The main gain comes with video encoding & simulation, check AVX512 out.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9700x/12.html
This product is not targeting gamer, but productivity needs.

Gamer with low budget should go for 7500F.

Puget also release content creation review.

For video encoding, unless one chasing for low bitrate with high quality, and for archiving propose,
for high performance live streaming GPU accelerated encoding would be wiser choice because performance hit is minimal compares to CPU which your FPS will tank

9600x was around that price when it was launched, no?

ya ya my bad it was a typo. meant to say 7600x. knowing malaysia price is all over the place. i do remember the 7600x is around rm1.3~1.4k and gradually goes down over time.

You forgot about 3700X and 5700X are 65W parts. Get some help.

2700X is 105W part, so going to 3700X @ 65W was regression? Since you are so fancy of the gaming performance, now tell me with PBO max, how good it is? Why are you not calling 7700X a scam? It is under the same situation too.

Just chill and consider it as a 7700XT, priced a little higher and run a little faster. If you want absolute best value, just get 14600KF?
Nobody is your savior and owes you something. You already can see it coming from the pricing. When AMD was leading in Athlon FX era, the processors were obscenely priced too. Intel too did the same, by giving you 4 cores for years.
Get quotation from shop, shopee does mark up. SRP is 1749, likely you will get some discount from shop when bundle with motherboard. 

DOA pricing. 9700X more expensive than 7800X3D.

Seems like you need to have your sarcasm meter fixed.

Well well well, looks like you were not aware of several points that I was trying to get you deduced.
- PBO doesn't magically increase the max boost clock for gaming. AMD PBO user should know about it as this behaviour has been around since the 3000 series. What it does is to relax the power limit so all cores can run at higher speed. It only does negligible change to the FPS chart, and performs well if and only if there is temperature headroom. 7700 will perform the same with 7700X. So you understand it now?
- 7700X is the hardest processor to cool in AM5 with highest base clock in a CCD, so the stock settings is already at the limit. It doesn't matter if you enable PBO or not, it still runs into the temperature limit quickly. There is only negligible gain. You can go ahead with AIO and it won't change the fact. This is also a known pattern from 3000 series (i.e. 3700X-3800X, 5700X-5800X).

** With 280 AIO.
- 7700 costs RM100 cheaper and comes with a nice RGB Wraith Prism cooler, potentially saves you RM250 (150 for PA120) from 7700X.
What do you get?
  - Similar gaming performance
  - Fancy of multithreading performance? Get a PA120 and enable PBO, you still save RM100.
https://www.techspot.com/review/2602-amd-ry...7600-7700-7900/

So tell me why should I get a 7700X and have it run at 65W or enable PBO to have some imaginary good gains? 7700 can do all these too.


Now do you want to call 7700X a scam?  On one hand, you asked people not to get 9700X, but on another side you asked people to get 7700X that has the same situation? 
You do aware that 13700K & 7800X3D is RM500 more expensive right? And not everyone buys PC for gaming with RTX4090 and get the massive benefits.

-----------------
Here's another drop for you.
It does run faster than 7700, you can't deny it. The price is stupid? Eventually it will replace 7700 after 7700/7700X stock run dry, and the market will tell. There is needless to echo what A says, what B says. Interpret the charts, know where it is good or bad in, end of story. As always, good product at cheap price will drive up demand and land at higher price due to high demand. The same too for badly priced products. It is how the market works. All your rant will become unneeded for when it is decided by market, not solely AMD alone.

P/S : AMD will be changing the TDP to 105W in AGESA 1.2.0.1a Patch A, so looks like they learnt their lesson?

-----------------

It is a ordinary CPU to start with, not specific for gaming. There are plenty of factors to consider, but generally go look for something else.

Hey, you need to think as a whole, not just because it doesn't offer nice value in gaming and it automatically sucks.
There are people out there who doesn't get the processor for gaming.

Gamers should continuing buying X3D, but whether their budget is suitable to put in X3D or not, that would in another story.
https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen-9600x-9700x
There are some really nice gains in Linux. In different point of view, the Zen 5 change inclines heavily to server workloads and that could be explained that the company's decision is shifting to gain more ground in higher valued server market. If you are doing software development, you will appreciate in many cases it is as good as the 12 cores 7900X.

Wow... how did AMD fumble this hard when there is no competition right now? Even the 99xx part also miserable.

Anyway, Im still waiting for APU from AMD. It does not look like there will be any decent APU from AMD despite them declaring low end GPU is dead. This is why I bought an Intel gaming laptop for my son while I replaced my desktop with Intel N100. It does not look like AMD will make an APU with decent 1080P gaming.

Boy, are you on anxiety or depression? Why are you taking things so personally & negatively? AMD doesn't owe you, any business decision they made now will end up reflected by market and it is their issue. As for as marketing goes, you learnt it hard from past launches from different camps right? AMD was even more rampant way back in Bulldozer launch. Just ignore them and get the figures from different sources on review day, do some brain work on which use case you think it could be helpful and possible to replace you suggestions in mind.

I'm not denying the gaming figures, and why are you taking Steam chart as Linux user amount? Phoronix review was all about server use case, not gaming.
Use the figures here : https://www.enterpriseappstoday.com/stats/l...statistics.html

PS: What defines "pro server" user? I run server operation by professional and personal. There are different considerations when choosing processor. TR & Epyc are not the silver bullet when you need the best single threaded performance. You need to widen up your eyes, not picking a side and shout all over the place it is bad vigorously. Look from different perspective and see if it changes the horizon, otherwise just call it a day and life goes on. Perhaps has little civil discussion on the reason why the result is not up to expectation, etc. Nobody likes to be your emotion garbage bin.

---
Won't consider 9700X (9600X erhm... hard to justify) as a flop/must not buy, but a small refresh with little launch tax. Depending on your use case, but generally people will find 7700 a easier choice. 99XX.... there is something to be sorted out, just wait for more follow-ups to come or ignore it, get 79XX and say bye.   Adventurous user could get it for research and create dispute.

Likely no APU can fit that since games' expectation grows faster than what hardware side can grow. On AM5 you are limited to memory channel support. Even if AMD provides you a 7700 class chip, it wont even work as good as 7600 due to bottlenecks.

Your best bet would be waiting for mini PC with Strix Halo, that comes up to 40CUs & 256-bit LPDDR5X support, but my gut feeling is it won't be cheap as it is a large monolithic chip.

dual GPU is actually good if you play games that does not require full fledge GPU, dGPU  will do the job
but setup might be complicated, typical game might not have option to choose gpu, you have to force it by connect the HDMI/DP to mobo in order to use iGP

option to choose GPU only exist on some AAA title iirc.

Let the RX580 rest in peace,
newer title will work better with newer GPU, because they're more focus on optimize for new drivers.

it really depends on what games you're playing, for me im just happy with my 680m from lappy, it play most the games i have except some due to RAM limitation (Doom Eternal)

I plays most of my games in 1080p on my 4K monitor (FSR Sharpening strength 100%)   

Here we go again, you got my point? You need judge it from different viewpoints. There are places where it shows good gain and it can be advocated for under such use cases and you denied those. It is exactly the same way where you ask people to go for 7800X3D for gaming, but for workloads that scales better with more cores, 7900 can be a good pick.

https://www.phoronix.com/review/ryzen-9600x-9700x/10
Take Python as an example. It is heavily used in data science / machine learning field. I have no problem recommending 9700X to those who want to target the machine for this kind of work.

Don't tell me yeah the industry uses TR / Epyc etc, this is for the workstation where engineer experiments things out before deploying the code to production in load balanced multiple instances. You could also ask nah, you are bullshitting, AI/ML uses GPU. The answer is, you need to do data preparation before passing the training to GPU. Wondering why Python shows so specific gain? It is "single threaded" due to GIL (Global intrepreter lock). Go ahead and deny Python.

The case is same with Node.js, where it's web server designs is on single thread event loop to process requests.

Next... let's go SVT-AV1. If someone is doing heavy AV1 CPU transcoding, usually with Handbrake (i.e. trying to minimize the video while keeping quality ok-ish), the AVX gain is there, it is cheaper & faster than 7900. Why not? But if you are doing x264/HEVC, just go 7900, the answer is simple.

From other productivity benchmarks, I have no problem recommending 9700X as a cost-effective server candidate. It can be useful to host in-house services in SME. It even has ECC where Intel deliberately masked it i5 or above level to push customers to Xeon. But... is there better other choices? Yes, let's have run some benchmarks against other and decide, I won't straight away say any is bad, but if that specific service is indeed running best in 9700X and that fits in customer budget, go ahead. There are some cases even people will use Intel N100 (yes, it is very very low performance, but the other factors such as form factor makes it good) as router.

Let's talk about your favourite Apple. M series is not right technically a server processor right? That doesn't stop people from using it to run CI/CD to run test / compile code with automation, and for that we call it as build server. You can rent some instances in AWS straight away and start using. Heck, there is no ECC RAM commonly found in server space, lacking in the Mac Mini!

The above are actually what is happening in the industry (yes, both Intel / AMD are milking hard the enterprise segment, consumer level gets dust due to the economic scale). Customers purchase machine just because they want to run very specific set of software. There is really companies who use commodity hardware by scale. They know what's the drawback and they have way to workaround them or just blatantly accept them since doesn't affect what they run. I believe you get the news of game company running into issue with 14900K as their game server, and that is an example.

Didn't you see that in earlier post I ask the other guy to go 7700?  It is always by scenario basis which I have been telling, but you keep telling nah it is bad no matter how. Who is in denial now? Why are you so angry? Did AMD set your expectation wrongly? 


Here's something to open your mind :
- https://www.youtube.com/@ServeTheHomeVideo/videos
- https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1915715

the games i play arent that demanding, mostly from hoyoverse, i can play cp2077 as well, everythng low in GQ.
nowadays i dont really buying new games, except those like Robocop, Talos of principle, and Dead space ect,

But Dead Space i would wait for new lappy, my Lenovo lappy is reach 2 years pf usage, battery already degraded.